Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
p.250 #1Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Dipping my toes back into M4/3 for the size and weight advantage over my L mount gear.
E-M1 mk1 & 12-40mm 2.8 II
E-M1 mk1 & 12-40mm 2.8 II
E-M1 OM 12-40mm F2.8 II lens 40mm f/8.0 1/800s 200 ISO -0.3 EV
May 01, 2026 at 07:23 PM
p.250 #2Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Ronny Olsson wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55242620951_d44a8c4a0c_k.jpg
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
My all time favorite Ronny. Simply perfect !!
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55242620951_d44a8c4a0c_k.jpg
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
My all time favorite Ronny. Simply perfect !!
May 01, 2026 at 08:35 PM
p.250 #3Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
sparadise wrote:
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on FlickrMy all time favorite Ronny. Simply perfect !!
Thanks Steve !
Ronny
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Ronny Olsson wrote
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55242620951_d44a8c4a0c_k.jpgOM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Thanks Steve !
Ronny
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
May 01, 2026 at 11:59 PM
p.250 #5Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
I know the 100-400 is lighter and does a great job but there is something special about pics taken with the 150-400mm. I do know they often times don't require any sharpening when converting the RAW file. Great woodpecker pic Ronny
May 02, 2026 at 08:25 AM
p.250 #6Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
sparadise wrote:
I know the 100-400 is lighter and does a great job but there is something special about pics taken with the 150-400mm. I do know they often times don't require any sharpening when converting the RAW file. Great woodpecker pic Ronny
I've never used the 150-400 but from what I see posted here I would agree with you. There is not a night and day difference but the 150-400 does have the edge. The results just look a bit crisper and the advantage in subject separation adds to it. I really wish they would have left off the built in TC and brought the cost down on that lens. Or else when they rebadged the 100-400, made it a 5.6 at the long end, upgraded the optics a bit, and internal zoom. Price it under $4000 and I'd be all in.
OM-1 MKll Olympus 100-400
I know the 100-400 is lighter and does a great job but there is something special about pics taken with the 150-400mm. I do know they often times don't require any sharpening when converting the RAW file. Great woodpecker pic Ronny
I've never used the 150-400 but from what I see posted here I would agree with you. There is not a night and day difference but the 150-400 does have the edge. The results just look a bit crisper and the advantage in subject separation adds to it. I really wish they would have left off the built in TC and brought the cost down on that lens. Or else when they rebadged the 100-400, made it a 5.6 at the long end, upgraded the optics a bit, and internal zoom. Price it under $4000 and I'd be all in.
OM-1 MKll Olympus 100-400
May 02, 2026 at 02:22 PM
p.250 #7Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
sum1sgrampa wrote:
I've never used the 150-400 but from what I see posted here I would agree with you. There is not a night and day difference but the 150-400 does have the edge. The results just look a bit crisper and the advantage in subject separation adds to it. I really wish they would have left off the built in TC and brought the cost down on that lens. Or else when they rebadged the 100-400, made it a 5.6 at the long end, upgraded the optics a bit, and internal zoom. Price it under $4000 and I'd be all in....Show more →
I realize it's expensive but there is always a reason a lens cost more. I was able to pick up a very lightly used one for $5800. Under 4000 isn't going to happen but you never know. Hard to say. For me I only have two lenses the 150-400 and the 12-100. When I sold my Sony stuff I had money left over because the body is so much cheaper. Since I bought the 150-400 my keeper rate on songbirds has gone up tremendously. I would give Sony a slight edge with BIF. I don't do feeder photography so I have to walk around and find them. The reach-weight ratio is simply unbeatable. I haven't had any issues with cropping quite extensively and high iso shots clean up easily. Recently I had gone through thousands of images I have accumulated over the years and the Olympus shots were always more pleasing to the eye for me. I think the OM-1 sensor is highly underrated. In fact to me the A1 had better IQ than the A1 2.
sparadise wrote
I know the 100-400 is lighter and does a great job but there is something special about pics taken with the 150-400mm. I do know they often times don't require any sharpening when converting the RAW file. Great woodpecker pic RonnyI realize it's expensive but there is always a reason a lens cost more. I was able to pick up a very lightly used one for $5800. Under 4000 isn't going to happen but you never know. Hard to say. For me I only have two lenses the 150-400 and the 12-100. When I sold my Sony stuff I had money left over because the body is so much cheaper. Since I bought the 150-400 my keeper rate on songbirds has gone up tremendously. I would give Sony a slight edge with BIF. I don't do feeder photography so I have to walk around and find them. The reach-weight ratio is simply unbeatable. I haven't had any issues with cropping quite extensively and high iso shots clean up easily. Recently I had gone through thousands of images I have accumulated over the years and the Olympus shots were always more pleasing to the eye for me. I think the OM-1 sensor is highly underrated. In fact to me the A1 had better IQ than the A1 2.
May 02, 2026 at 02:36 PM
p.250 #8Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Abandoned
E-M1 OM 12-40mm F2.8 II lens 40mm f/3.2 1/125s 200 ISO -0.7 EV
May 02, 2026 at 03:55 PM
p.250 #9Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
.
E-M1 OM 12-40mm F2.8 II lens 30mm f/5.0 1/250s 200 ISO -0.7 EV
May 02, 2026 at 05:19 PM
p.250 #10Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Thanks Steve
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
May 03, 2026 at 01:24 AM
|
p.250 #11Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
sparadise wrote:
I've never used the 150-400 but from what I see posted here I would agree with you. There is not a night and day difference but the 150-400 does have the edge. The results just look a bit crisper and the advantage in subject separation adds to it. I really wish they would have left off the built in TC and brought the cost down on that lens. Or else when they rebadged the 100-400, made it a 5.6 at the long end, upgraded the optics a bit, and internal zoom. Price it under $4000 and I'd be all in.I realize it's expensive but there is always a reason a lens cost more. I was able to pick up a very lightly used one for $5800. Under 4000 isn't going to happen but you never know. Hard to say. For me I only have two lenses the 150-400 and the 12-100. When I sold my Sony stuff I had money left over because the body is so much cheaper. Since I bought the 150-400 my keeper rate on songbirds has gone up tremendously. I would give Sony a slight edge with BIF. I don't do feeder photography so I...Show more →
My "under $4000" number was referring to a mythical upgrade to the 100-400. About a year and a half ago MPB had three used 150-400's for $5500-$5800. I was tempted at that time but still too expensive. Now even used they're over $7000. If I'm being honest, I regret getting rid of my Z9 and Z 180-600. My reasons for swapping are still valid, too big and heavy, wasn't using it enough, didn't like switching between two different systems, but I think I overestimated all those issues. I'm in no hurry to do anything right now so I'm just waiting to see if the prices on used gear, no matter what it is, gets back to realistic numbers.
sum1sgrampa wrote
sparadise wrote
I know the 100-400 is lighter and does a great job but there is something special about pics taken with the 150-400mm. I do know they often times don't require any sharpening when converting the RAW file. Great woodpecker pic RonnyMy "under $4000" number was referring to a mythical upgrade to the 100-400. About a year and a half ago MPB had three used 150-400's for $5500-$5800. I was tempted at that time but still too expensive. Now even used they're over $7000. If I'm being honest, I regret getting rid of my Z9 and Z 180-600. My reasons for swapping are still valid, too big and heavy, wasn't using it enough, didn't like switching between two different systems, but I think I overestimated all those issues. I'm in no hurry to do anything right now so I'm just waiting to see if the prices on used gear, no matter what it is, gets back to realistic numbers.
May 03, 2026 at 06:58 AM
p.250 #14Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Sometimes a portrait lens can also act as a wildlife lens.
 |
||
 |
||
 |
OM-3 OLYMPUS M.75mm F1.8 lens 75mm f/1.8 1/320s 640 ISO 0.0 EV
|
||
 |
||
|
OM-3 OLYMPUS M.75mm F1.8 lens 75mm f/1.8 1/320s 640 ISO 0.0 EV
|
||
 |
||
|
OM-3 OLYMPUS M.75mm F1.8 lens 75mm f/1.8 1/320s 640 ISO 0.0 EV
May 03, 2026 at 09:39 AM
p.250 #20Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread
Very early here in Sweden for dragonfly season
Har is the first species this year
Ronny
Sympecma fusca ( Vinterflickslända )
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Har is the first species this year
Ronny
Sympecma fusca ( Vinterflickslända )
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
May 05, 2026 at 11:15 AM